Aim: Diabetes mellitus (DM) and related foot complications constitute a growing healthcare burden. Diabetes mellitus is associated with lower-limb amputation, but diabetic foot assessment is challenging. Here, we evaluated a novel noninvasive diagnostic method—infrared thermography (IRT) —assessing its diagnostic potential compared to conventional noninvasive measurements. Methods: This study included patients with DM ( n = 118) and healthy controls ( n = 93). All participants underwent ankle brachial index and toe pressure (TP) measurements, and IRT using a standardized protocol with temperature measurement at five foot areas. Results: Compared to controls, patients with DM generally had warmer feet and exhibited a significantly greater temperature difference between feet ( P < .001). Mean temperatures were highest in patients with DM with neuroischemia, followed by neuropathy. Patients with DM with angiopathy showed the lowest mean temperature—similar to controls and noncomplicated diabetics. Mean temperatures at all measurement sites were significantly higher with abnormal TP (<50 mmHg) than normal TP (≥50 mmHg) ( P < .001). Infrared thermography revealed differences between angiosome areas, subclinical infections, and plantar high-pressure areas. Conclusion: Infrared thermography revealed local temperature differences in high-risk diabetic feet. Normal skin surface temperature varies between individuals, but in combination with other tools, IRT might be useful in clinical screening. ClinicalTrials ID: 14212016

OBJECTIVE The prevalence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is increasing worldwide. The ankle-brachial index (ABI) is considered the criterion standard of noninvasive screening, but it does have limitations. The present study aimed to clarify the clinical diagnostic potential of infrared thermography (IRT) compared with conventional noninvasive measurements for PAD. METHODS Patients were divided into two groups: the healthy control group (n = 93) and the PAD group (n = 164). Control participants had an ABI 0.9 to 1.4 and no former PAD diagnosis. The PAD group was divided into three subgroups based on ABI classifications and two subgroups based on toe pressure measurements. Investigators performed IRT using a standardized protocol with temperature measurements at five different foot sites. MAIN RESULTS Differences in skin temperatures between feet were greater (P < .001) in the PAD group than in healthy controls. In general, mean foot temperatures were lower in the PAD group than in controls but did not differ significantly among PAD subgroups based on ABI classifications or toe pressure measurements. CONCLUSIONS Infrared thermography effectively distinguished temperature differences between feet and thus might be diagnostically useful. However, because normal skin surface temperature varies among individuals, IRT alone cannot be recommended for evaluating PAD. However, it does have potential to provide additional information about circulation, subclinical infections, and the severity of vascular disease.

Background: The purpose of this study was with a simple clinical setting to compare skin temperature changes in the feet before and after revascularization and to identify possible correlation between ankle brachial index (ABI) and toe pressure (TP) values and foot skin temperature patient with and without diabetes. Methods: Forty outpatient clinic patients were measured ABI, TP, and the skin temperature using infrared thermography (IRT) at the foot before and after revascularization. Patients in the revascularization group were divided into subgroups depending on whether they had diabetes or not and a wound or not. Results: There were clear correlation between increase of ABI and TP and increase of the mean skin temperature on the feet after revascularization. The temperature was higher and the temperature change was greater among patients with diabetes. Side-to-side temperature difference between the revascularized feet and contralateral feet decreased after treatment. The mean temperature was higher in the feet with wound whether patient had diabetes mellitus or not. Conclusion: The simple, prompt, and noninvasive IRT procedure showed its potential as a follow-up tool among patients with diabetes or peripheral arterial disease and previous lower limb revascularization.

No abstract